Malaysian courts used an AI system to recommend prison sentences in drug possession cases, with judges following some but not all recommendations, raising constitutional concerns about due process and equal protection.
In February 2022, Malaysian courts in Sabah and Sarawak began using an AI sentencing recommendation system developed by Sarawak Information Systems for drug possession and rape cases. The system analyzed court databases from 2014-2019 to provide sentencing recommendations based on precedent cases. Magistrate Jessica Ombou Kakayun used the AI system in four cases, sentencing Denis Modili to 12 months jail (AI recommended 10 months) and Christopher Divineson Moinol to 9 months jail (AI recommended 9 months), both for methamphetamine possession. Defense lawyer Hamid Ismail objected, arguing the AI use violated Articles 5(1) and 8(1) of the Federal Constitution regarding due process and equal protection. Chief Justice David Wong defended the system as improving consistency and efficiency, noting judges retained final decision-making authority. The AI pilot expanded to Kuala Lumpur in mid-2021 covering 20 crime types. Analysis by Khazanah Research Institute found judges followed AI recommendations in one-third of cases, with some reducing sentences for mitigating factors. Critics raised concerns about algorithmic bias, lack of transparency, and the system's inability to consider individual circumstances and changing social values.
Domain classification, causal taxonomy, severity scores, and national security assessments were LLM-classified and may contain errors.
Unequal treatment of individuals or groups by AI, often based on race, gender, or other sensitive characteristics, resulting in unfair outcomes and unfair representation of those groups.
AI system
Due to a decision or action made by an AI system
Intentional
Due to an expected outcome from pursuing a goal
Post-deployment
Occurring after the AI model has been trained and deployed